Vayikra. Nochach and Nistar, Second and Third Person by Korbanos. Ich und Du

The instructions of Korbanos are in third person- he. See 1:3, 1:14, 1:10, 3:1 - יקריב אתו, והקריב מן התרים,  זכר תמים יקריבנו, אם־זכר אם נקבה תמים יקריבנו . 

However, the Korban Mincha is stated in second person- you. See 2:11, 2:12, and 2:13 - אשר תקריבו, קרבן ראשית תקריבו , וכל קרבן מנחתך במלח תמלח. 

In Shmoneh Esrei, all brachos follow the format of Nochach/Nistar, with one exception. Modim could follow the same format and end with Hatov Shemo, veLo na'eh lehodos. But it doesn't. It is stated in second person - hatov shimcha, lecha na'eh lehodos.

Reb Yaakov Emden in Beis Yaakov says that the eighteen verses in Yehi chevod correspond to the brachos in Shmoneh Esrei. It has been pointed out that all but one are lashon nistar - the fourth verse, Hashem Shimcha leolam va'ed Hashem Zichrecha ledor vador. It seems that this verse corresponds with Modim. 

Why? What is the common denominator?

Rav Bergman (Shaarei Orah/Maamarim/Vayikra) points out that whereas other korbanos yield a benefit to the baalim, this is not true by a minchas nedava. No kapara at all (he quotes the Steipler in Zevachim as stating this) and the baalim never ever eats any of it. Even a Kohen doesn't eat from his own Mincha, because it's kallil. (This is an oddity that I never saw an explanation for until now!) Indeed, when discussing the Minchas Chotei, the Torah does not use the lashon nochach. 

Lechoira, you can ask that one of the Menachos mentioned above is the Minchas Ha'Omer, that is mattir Chodosh, which is a tremendous benefit. But, remarkably enough, the Sifra says that the Torah introduces the parsha of Minchas Haomer with Im to teach you that you should be makriv as a nedava, not for the toeles of hetter - ואם תקריב מנחת בכורים!

ספרא, ויקרא דבורא דנדבה, פרשה יג ב-ג

[ב] ר' שמעון אומר "ואם תקריב מנחת בכורים לשם" – זו מנחה באה חובה. יכול נדבה? כשהוא אומר (ויקרא כג, י) "והבאתם את עמר ראשית קצירכם אל הכהן" למד שאינה באה אלא חובה.

[ג] ואם כן למה נאמר "ואם"? לומר אם אתם מביאים אותה לרצון מעלה אני עליכם כאילו נדבה הבאתם אותה, ואם אין אתם מביאים אותה לרצון מעלה אני עליכם כאילו לא הבאתם אותה אלא לצורך עצמכם.

Pretty cool, no?

Rav Bergman has a different mehalach, but I would suggest that the common denominator is that both by Modim and by Korban Mincha, you are not there to get anything. By Modim, you're not saying "Give," you're saying "thank you for what you've given." Sure, there are plenty of unctuous sycophants who only express gratitude to ingratiate themselves, but that is not the intent of the bracha of Modim.

The idea is that in both cases, one is approaching the Ribono shel Olam with absolutely no self interest, only to express respect and love and gratitude. Such a person is a ben bayis, not an outsider, and the relationship is Ich/Du, Lashon Nochach.

Vayikra. Korbanos and Fiscal Probity; Aveilus and Shalach Manos; Aveilus and Davening for the Amud.

This is the Kollel Horaah of America's Parsha Sheet. Each of the three sections is insightful and informative, and I found it particularly interesting this week.  

Gaining a Closer Relationship with Hashem R' Moshe Orgel The תורה in this weeks פרשה writes a one פסוק introduction prior to detailing the specifics of the korbanos, “אדם כי יקריב מכם קרבן וכו” The גמ׳ derives many הלכות from this פסוק. One of them is derived from the word כי יקריב מכם קרבן אדם. Rashi explains that we learn that someone bringing a קרבן must do so from his own animals and money and not from stealing someone else’s, just like אדם הראשון did not possess any stolen objects – as he had no one to steal from; so too one's קרבן may not be from stolen property. There are many other מצות which have the same exclusion – not to come from stolen property, for example; the תורה says that a לולב must be לכם from your property, not of someone else’s. קרבנות is the only place where the תורה alludes to this using the word אדם . What is unique about the פרשה of קרבנות that requires a different more complicated לימוד as opposed to the תורה simply writing לכם or something of that sort?  The word קרבן denotes קורבה, closeness. The purpose of bringing a קרבן is to gain a closer relationship with Hashem and strive higher in רוחניות. The תורה is teaching us that in regard to this מצוה it is not merely enough to do the mitzvah with your own money, but rather you should be like אדם הראשון. He did not have one penny that was not his, nor could he covet someone else’s property as there was no one else in the world but him. Theft by him was an impossibility, not simply a choice. When someone steals, he is not only doing the actual sin, he is in addition demonstrating his lack of אמונה ובטחון. If he truly knows that Hashem will provide with all he needs and that it is predestined each year what he will attain that year, he wouldn’t be stealing as there would be no point he is only getting a certain amount of money anyway. A person needs to recognize that just as is was impossible for אדם הראשון to steal, so too it is impossible for one to achieve anything through theft. With this idea in mind it is easy to understand what is unique about קרבנות that requires the law of stealing to come from the word אדם. The word אדם is not just teaching us a single focused law, rather an idea of how someone should conduct themselves. While attempting to come closer to Hashem through קרבנות or through תפילה one must make sure that the rest of one’s actions and thoughts are also up to par. Working on אמונה ובטחון to a level where one recognizes that all is from Hashem and one’s actions can’t change that is an integral aspect of the עבודה of the קרבנות. May we all be זוכה to become closer to Hashem, both through תפילה as well as אמונה ובטחון.

Editor's remark: 1. Chazal learn from the words Adam ki yakriv that just as Adam Harishon brought korbanos that were 100% his, with no admixture of theft, our korbanos must be equally pure. Rabbi Orgel sees this as a far broader lesson - if you want to bring a korban, YOU have to be like Adam. If you possess any stolen property, your korban is undesireable. I would put it this way: By Korban Pesach, if you own Chametz at the time of the hakrava, the korban is improper (you're over a lahv, but the Korban is kasher - Rambam Pesach 1:5.) Just as it is assur to bring a Korban Pesach when you own Chametz, so too it is assur to bring any Korban if you possess property that was acquired dishonestly.  It's not a lahv, and it doesn't passel the korban, but it's meguneh, and if you're looking for Ritzui, that's not where to look.  It might be interesting to think about whether this applies to Shemoneh Esrei. אורח חיים Rabbi Shmuel Goldstein Question: Can an Avel give and be given Mishloach Manos? Answer: The Gemara says that an Avel during Shivah, (the first seven days, counting from the funeral), may not say Shalom Aleichem to others [a]. One may not say Shalom Aleichem to an Avel throughout Shloshim, (the first thirty days counting from the funeral), and for the twelve months if the Avel is in Aveilus for a parent [b]. There are different opinions with regard to greeting someone with saying Shalom Aleichem on Shabbos [c]. It is permitted to give a Bracha to an Avel, and therefore one can say “good Shabbos” [d]. Saying “good morning” is also technically permitted. Some refrain from doing so, especially during Shivah [e]. The Ramah says that many people say Shalom after thirty days, during the twelve months of Avielus for a parent, but he says that he doesn’t know what they rely on, unless our greeting isn’t like the one in the time of Chazal [f]. Most Acharonim do not give credence to this leniency [g]. However it seems the Ramah may have been referring to statements like “good morning” [h]. The Maharil says that giving someone a present is the same as saying Shalom Aleichem, and therefore one may not give Mishloach Manos to an Avel. This would apply to giving an Avel throughout Shloshim, and for the twelve months if the Avel is in Aveilus for a parent [i]. Although an Avel during Shivah may not give presents, since Mishloach Manos is an obligation, they may and must give [j]. Some Acharonim say an Avel should only give Mishloach Manos to one or two people [k]. Either way an Avel should not give extra happy things in the Mishloach Manos [l]. Those who are lenient, and give an Avel, are relying on those who opine that Purim is like Shabbos regarding Aveilus combined with relying on those who opine that Shalom Aleichem is permitted on Shabbos [m]. If an Avel is after the third day of Aveilus, and they were given Mishloach Manos, they may accept it [n]. It is permitted to give Mishloach Manos to a Rebbe or someone whom the gift is almost like part of a salary [o]. Editor's remark: This halacha of Mishloach Manos and Aveilus is not widely known, nor is the proscription from greeting an aveil with Shalom Aleichem during the entire year. As Rabbi Goldstein quoted from the Maharil, these two laws are the same - giving Shalach Manos is like greeting with Shalom Aleichem. It's also worth remembering that this applies during Kiddush Levana. יורה דעה R' Mechi Plittman

Question: When should an Avel serve as the Shatz? Are there any times when he should not act as שליח ציבור? Answer: The רמ''א writes that the minhag has become that an avel does not daven for the amud on שבת ויו”ט [a]. The ש''ך explains that the same applies to the ימים נוראים [b]. The נודה ביהודה understands that to mean only ראש השנה ויום כפור and not ימי סליחות ועשרת ימי תשובה [c], during which the אבל can indeed lead the ציבור. The reason for this minhag is that it is inapropiate for one in mourning to lead the congregation when the congregation is in a state of שמחה [d]. It is important to note that his is a minhag and not an איסור [e]. This applies, both, to a son during the twelve months after losing a parent, and to any mourner for the duration of שלושים of a close relative [f]. Many אחרונים ask [g]; the רמ''א himself writes his sefer דרכי משה, that an אבל refrains from serving as שליח ציבור on ראש חודש as well. Furthermore, the source for רמ''א is the מהרי"ל who implies that this halacha applies to any day that we say הלל. That would include חנוכה ופורים [h]. So why then, does the רמ''א only mention שבת ויו''ט in the שלחן ערוך. The ערוך השלחן answers that the רמ''א only listed the days on which an אבל does not daven for the amud the entire day i.e. שבת ויו"ט. On ראש חודש or חנוכה ופורים just refrain from davening in the morning, but he may daven for the עמוד for מנחה ומעריב [i]. This is the opinion of the משנה ברורה [j] as well. There are some who understand this minhag to allow the אבל to daven שחרית as well and just not daven הלל ומוסף [k]. On חול המועד there is a dispute if an אבל should daven for the amud at all. Some maintain that he should refrain from serving as ש''ץ for it is similar to a יו”ט [l]. However, many אחרונים are of the opinion that on any day we say הלל an אבל should not daven for the amud even מנחה ומעריב. This was the opinion of Rav Moshe [m]. All other days that we don’t say תחנון for example, ל"ג בעומר ט"ו שבט ט"ו באב an אבל may daven for the amud [n]. There is an opinion that rules that any day that you don’t say קל ארך אפים and למנצח an אבל should not daven for the amud. That would include ערב פסח, ט' באב, ערב יו"כ, שושן פורים, פורים קטן [o]. However, it’s clear from the source of the רמ''א that only days which הלל is said is there a minhag for an אבל not to be the ש''ץ. This minhag comes from a different source which doesn’t agree with the רמ''א.  If the chazon for the shul during the ימים נוראים is an אבל he may daven for the עמוד if no one can replace him and his abilities [p]. On Shabbos and יו''ט if no one inspires the shul like him then he may be the Shatz [q], but just because he sounds good is not a heter. The same applies to the reading of the מגילה if no one can pronounce the words and read כהלכה like him then he may read the מגילה [r]. Otherwise he should refrain. Editor's remark: The halacha that an aveil may daven for the amud on yomtov if the tzibbur needs him became relevant to a friend this past year. He had retained to daven on the Yamim Nor'aim, and he became an aveil the day before Rosh Hashannah. He was the only Shliach Tzibbur available for that certain shul. I told him to leave the Shiva house during shiva, and fly back to Chicago to daven for the Amud on Rosh Hashanna.

To receive Points to Ponder weekly via email, please contactkollelhoraah@gmail.com or text KHAWEEKLY to 22828

מראה מקומות לדין אורח חיים

a) גמרא מו"ק טו. וכא:

b) גמרא מו"ק טו. וכא:

c) ע' רא"ש מו"ק פרק ג' סי' כ"ח ול"ח

מירושלמי ברכות ב:ז, רמב"ם אבל י:א. ש"ע שפה:ג.

d) שלמת חיים תכ"ה [קל"ג], גשה"ח כא:ז:ד-ז, להורות נתן חלק ב' סי' ל"ז

e) ע' לקט יושר עמ' ק"י, מ"ב תקנ"ד ס"ק מ"א, באר משה חלק ד' סי' ק"ו, להורות נתן חלק ב' סי' ל"ז

f) רמ"א שפה:א

g) ש"ך יו"ד שפ"ה ס"ק ג' ומג"א או"ח תקנ"ד ס"ק כ"א

h) ע' בה"ט יו"ד שפ"ה ס"ק ב', מ"ב תקנ"ד ס"ק מ"א, לקט יושר עמ' ק"י, באר משה חלק ד' סי' ק"ו, להורות נתן חלק ב' סי' ל"ז

i) הובא ברמ"א יו"ד שפה:ג ובאו"ח תרצו:ו

j) ש"ע או"ח תרצו:ו עם מ"ב ס"ק י"ז

k) נחלת שבעה סי' י"ז וקובץ הלכות פרק ט"ו הע' מ"ד

l) מ"ב תרצ"ו ס"ק י"ח

m)  ע' מג"א או"ח תרצ"ו

n) כתב סופר או"ח סי' קמ"א

o) דברי למכיאל חלק ה' סי' רל"ז 

מראה מקומות לדין יורה דעה

a רמ"א יו"ד שע"ו

b) ש"ך שם סקי"ד בשם המהרי"ל

c) נו"ב או"ח סי' ל"ב

d) שו"ת מהרי"ל סי' כ"ב

e) רמ"א שם

f) מ"ב או"ח תקפ"א סק"ז

g) ערוך השלחן שע"ו סקי"ד

h) כל בו על אבילות עמ' רפ"ז

i) ערוך השלחן שם ועיין מהר"ם שיק או"ח קפ"ג שכן נוהג החת"ס

j) מ"ב תקפ"א סק"ז ותרע"א סקמ"ד ותרפ"ג סק"א

k) גליון מהרש"א סי' שע"ו ובא"ר או"ח סס"י תקפ"ב ופרמ"ג תרע"א מ"ז סק"ח וגשר החיים כ"ג:ה

l) מ"ב תרע"א סקמ"ד בשם הפמ"ג וגשר החיים כ"ג:ד סברו לא התפלל ושו"ת מהר"ם מינץ מ"ג וערוך השלחן שם סברו יכול התפלל

m) רבבות אפרים ח"א תמ"ג בשם ר' משה

n) מ"ב תרע"א סקמ"ד וגשר החיים כ"ג:ו

o) מ"ב קל"ב במאמר קדישים ונועם מגדים להפמ"ג מנהגים א'

p) ש"ך שע"ו סקי"ד בשם מהרי"ו

q) כן משמע מדרכי משה במה שכתב "אף" ימים נוראים ומ"ב תקפ"א ז' ותרצ"ו י"ב ולא כב"ח יו"דשפ"ו

r) מ"ב תרצ"ו סקי"ב

To receive Points to Ponder weekly via email, please contact kollelhoraah@gmail.com or text KHAWEEKLY to 22828

Vayikra. A Guest Post from Rav Pinchas Freidman, Shvilei Pinchas

This post was translated and graciously provided to us by Dr. Baruch Fox.  If you want to get Rav Friedman's divrei Torah weekly, please write to Dr. Fox at  rebboruch at Yahoo


“And he shall scoop from there his full three fingers full of its fine flour and of its oil”

HKB”H the Supreme Heavenly Priest Takes the Best “Kometz” from
Our Torah Study and Fulfillment of Mitzvot

In this week’s parsha, parshat Vayikra, we learn about the “korban-minchah”--"קרבן מנחה לה'".  It differs from all of the other offerings which are brought primarily from animals; the korban-minchah is brought from vegetation—from fine flour to which oil and frankincense are added, as it is written (Vayikra 2, 1): 

"ונפש כי תקריב קרבן מנחה לה', סולת יהיה קרבנו ויצק עליה שמן ונתן עליה לבונה, והביאה אל בני אהרן הכהנים, וקמץ משם מלוא קמצו מסלתה ומשמנה על כל לבונתה, והקטיר הכהן את אזכרתה המזבחה אשה ריח ניחוח לה'"—When a soul will bring a meal-offering (a korban-minchah) to Hashem, his offering shall be of fine flour; he shall pour oil on it and place frankincense on it.  He shall bring it to the sons of Aharon, the Kohanim, and he shall scoop from there his full three fingers full, of its fine flour and of its oil, as well as all its frankincense; and the Kohen shall cause its memorial portion to go up in smoke upon the altar—a fire-offering, a satisfactory aroma to Hashem. 

Rashi comments:  "ונפש כי תקריב, לא נאמר נפש בכל קרבנות נדבה אלא במנחה, מי דרכו להתנדב מנחה - עני, אמר הקב"ה מעלה אני עליו כאלו הקריב נפשו" “soul” was not used with reference to any voluntary offerings except for the meal-offering.  Whose practice is it to dedicate a meal-offering?  It is a poor person's.  HKB”H said:  I consider it on his behalf as if he offered his soul. 

Now that the Beit HaMikdash has been destroyed—due to our countless transgressions—and neither the Kohanim, Leviim or Yisroelim are able to perform their prescribed service, we are no longer able to actually bring a korban-minchah.  Nevertheless, we learn an important principle from the great author of the Bnei Yissaschar.  He writes in his Derech Pikudechah (Intro. 3, 5) that even if we are unable to actually perform a particular mitzvah today, we are still required to examine and study the reasons and implications associated with that mitzvah.  Thus, we can ascertain how to at least fulfill the mitzvah in thought; by doing so, it will be considered as if we actually fulfilled that particular mitzvah. 

In our current state, we, the holy Children of Yisroel, exist in exile as poor paupers who would ordinarily donate a korban-minchah to Hashem.  Therefore, it behooves us to seek the essential lesson inherent in the offering of the korban-minchah.  In this manner, we can at least bring Hashem a korban-minchah in thought and in an alternative form--which the Blessed One will treat as if we had actually brought a real korban-minchah. 

“Fine flour mixed with oil” Combining Torah-study with Good Deeds

Let us begin our journey by introducing a statement of Chazal’s in the Midrash Tanchuma (Acharei Mot 10): 

"צפה הקב"ה שבית המקדש עתיד ליחרב, ואמר הקב"ה לישראל, כל זמן שבית המקדש קיים ואתם מקריבין קרבנות לתוכו מתכפר עליכם, ובזמן שאין בית המקדש קיים במה מתכפר עליכם, התעסקו בדברי תורה שהן משולין כקרבנות והן מתכפרין עליכם".

Anticipating the destruction of the Beit HaMikdash, HKB”H said to Yisroel:  “When the Beit HaMikdash no longer exists, how will you achieve atonement?  Occupy yourselves with words of Torah, which are analogous to sacrifices—they will atone for your sins.”

With this idea in mind, let us consider how words of Torah represent an alternative to a korban minchah.  We find in the Midrash that "סולת", fine flour, alludes to the Torah.  For, one must labor to refine one’s learning just like one refines coarse flour.  The Siftei Kohen in parshat Pinchas (Bamidbar 25, 5) provides us with a beautiful allusion.  When we spell out each letter of the Hebrew word for fine flour, סל"ת, we get the following:  סמ"ך למ"ד תי"ו.  The numerical sum of these letters plus one equals the numerical value of the word תור"ה, 611. 

Notwithstanding, to achieve the ideal state of perfection, Torah must be combined "בשמן", with oil—which represents good deeds.  This analogy is found in the Midrash (Bamidbar Rabbah 13, 15) which discusses the offerings brought by the heads of each tribe during the inauguration of the Mishkan. 

We see, therefore, that even during this bitter exile, when we no longer have the Beit HaMikdash, it is imperative that we bring a korban-minchah to Hashem in an alternative form in order to fulfill, in the best way possible, the words of the passuk:  "ונפש כי תקריב קרבן מנחה לה'"--when a soul will bring a meal-offering (a korban-minchah) to Hashem.  As we learned from Rashi:  " מי דרכו להתנדב מנחה - עני"—it is a pauper who brings a korban-minchah.  This alludes to times of exile, when we are truly paupers both physically and spiritually. 

Concerning periods of exile, we have learned (Berachot 8a):  "מיום שחרב בית המקדש אין לו להקב"ה בעולמו אלא ד' אמות של הלכה בלבד"—in the aftermath of the destruction of the Beit HaMikdash, the only thing remaining for HKB”H in His world is a mere four cubits of halachah.  Hence, during times of exile, we must continue to offer Hashem a form of the korban-minchah:  "סולת יהיה קרבנו"—an offering of finely, refined flour—by toiling in our Torah-study to clarify the true meaning of each and every halachah until it is as clear and pure as well-refined flour; "ויצק עליה שמן"—then we must combine what we have learned with good deeds, representing oil; "ונתן עליה לבונה"—and we must sanctify our thoughts, like pure frankincense, by devoting our Torah-study and good deeds exclusively to Hashem. 

“And he shall scoop from there his full ‘kometz’”

Following this lead, let us proceed to delve into the mitzvah of “kmitzah”—taking a scoopful of the “minchah” with a unique three finger procedure—that was an integral part of the korban minchah ritual:  "והביאה אל בני אהרן הכהנים, וקמץ משם מלוא קמצו מסלתה ומשמנה על כל לבונתה, והקטיר הכהן את אזכרתה המזבחה אשה ריח ניחוח לה'"—he shall bring it to the sons of Aharon, the Kohanim, and he shall scoop from there his full three fingers full, of its fine flour and of its oil, as well as all its frankincense; and the Kohen shall cause its memorial portion to go up in smoke upon the altar—a fire-offering, a satisfying aroma to Hashem.  It is important to understand the practical significance of this procedure.  Why does the Kohen take a mere three-finger scoop-- from the entire meal-offering brought by the pauper--to offer on the altar as a satisfying present to Hashem? 

Surely, this unique ritual possesses an underlying message of great significance relevant to a Jew’s service of Hashem.  Let us begin by examining a fascinating Midrash concerning the creation of man (B.R. 8, 5): 

"אמר רבי סימון, בשעה שבא הקב"ה לבראות את אדם הראשון, נעשו מלאכי השרת כיתים כיתים וחבורות, מהם אומרים אל יברא ומהם אומרים יברא, הדא הוא דכתיב (תהלים פה יא) חסד ואמת נפגשו צדק ושלום נשקו. חסד אומר יברא שהוא גומל חסדים, ואמת אומר אל יברא שכולו שקרים, צדק אומר יברא שהוא עושה צדקות, שלום אומר אל יברא דכוליה קטטא [שכולו מריבות].

מה עשה הקב"ה, נטל אמת והשליכו לארץ, הדא הוא דכתיב (דניאל ח יב) ותשלך אמת ארצה. אמרו מלאכי השרת לפני הקב"ה, רבון העולמים מה אתה מבזה תכסיס אלטיכסייה שלך, [רש"י: חותמו של הקב"ה אמת], תעלה אמת מן הארץ, הדא הוא דכתיב (תהלים פה יב) אמת מארץ תצמח".

When HKB”H decided to created the first man, Adam HaRishon, the ministering agents were not all in agreement with this decision.  Conflicting groups felt that man should be created, while others felt that he should not be created.  Chesed, Kindness, said that he should be created because of the acts of kindness he performs.  Emet, Truth, said that he should not be created—arguing that he is full of lies.  Tzedek, Righteousness, argued that he should be created, because of his righteous and charitable acts; while Shalom, Peace, felt that he should not be created, because he is extremely argumentative. 

In response, HKB”H took Emet and threw him down to earth, as the passuk states (Daniel 8, 12):  ותשלך אמת ארצה—and Emet was thrown down to earth.  The ministering agents said to HKB”H:  why are you abusing Your trademark in this fashion?  As Rashi explains, HKB”H’s trademark is truth. 

All of the commentaries are baffled by this Midrash.  Why did HKB”H choose to throw Emet down to earth.  Firstly, if HKB”H wished to create man despite Emet’s objections—that man is by nature a liar—no one could prevent Him from doing so—even without tossing Emet down to earth.  Secondly, if HKB”H intended to provide the angels with a response, what message did HKB”H send them by throwing Emet down to earth? 

The Yifeh Toar explains that Emet represents the Torah, as indicated by the formula of the berachah:  "אשר נתן לנו תורת אמת"—Who gave us the Torah of truth (emet).  Now, the angels forming the group of Shalom were also against the decision to create man.  They argued that he is prone to fights and disputes; his internal inclination, his yetzer, will persuade his body to battle and dispute his soul, causing him to sin.  Yet, HKB”H left Shalom alone and chose to take Emet—representing the Torah—and throw her down to earth.  This demonstrative act indicated that HKB”H ultimately planned to give Yisroel the Torah down on earth.  By occupying themselves with Torah study, they would have the ideal remedy to combat the yetzer.  As the Gemarah (Kiddushin 30b) explains, the Torah is the antidote for the yetzer hara. 

In this manner, he explains the ministering angels’ objection:  "רבון העולמים מה אתה מבזה תכסיס אלטיכסייה שלך, תעלה אמת מן הארץ"—Master of the Universe, why are you abusing your trademark; bring Emet back from earth.  This is quite similar to the angels’ argument at the time the Torah was given (Shabbat 88b):  "מה אנוש כי תזכרנו ובן אדם כי תפקדנו"—what is a mortal that You should remember him or the son of man that You should recall him?  They claimed that it would be an insult to the Torah to remain down on earth among such lowly, physical creatures.  Instead:  "תנה הודך על השמים"—bestow Your glory upon the heavens.  HKB”H replied that indeed the Torah would be glorified and honored by being given to Yisroel.  For, the passuk states:  "אמת מארץ תצמח"—Emet (truth) will sprout forth from the earth—only down on earth can the Torah be clarified properly. 

“Truth will sprout from the earth” Like a Fruit that Sprouts when the Debris Is Cleared away

Following his hallowed trail, I would like to propose an interpretation of our sages’ enigmatic portrayal of this heavenly dialogue between HKB”H and the groups of angels.  He tossed Emet down to earth so that:  "אמת מארץ תצמח"-- Emet (truth) will sprout forth from the earth.  How does this act constitute a decisive rebuttal of Emet’s original argument:  "אל יברא שכולו שקרים"—that man should not be created, because he is by nature a liar?  First, though, let us address Yisroel’s sweet psalmist’s words (Tehillim 88, 12):  "אמת מארץ תצמח".  Why is the clarification of Emet defined in terms of growth from the earth? 

It appears that with this particular phraseology:  "אמת מארץ תצמח", David HaMelech conveyed to us an essential fact concerning the refinement and revelation of truth in this world.  It is truly analogous to growth from the earth.  A fruit must be refined and revealed from within its husk and outer peel; wheat must be separated from the chaff.  We have learned in the Gemarah in the name of Rashbi (Berachot 55a):  "שאי אפשר לבר בלא תבן"—it is impossible to have wheat without chaff.  In the exact same manner, the truth must be revealed from within the depths and context of lies; it is necessary to separate out the illuminating elements of truth from the falsehood.  Since we have already learned that Torah is compared to fine flour, let us examine the process of how wheat is grown and ultimately processed into fine flour. 

To begin with, the earth must be plowed and the rocks must be removed so that the ground will be suitable to yield produce.  Next, the seeds of wheat are planted, the ground is fertilized and irrigated with water, and the process of growth begins from the depths of the earth.  The external shell of the seed decomposes underground, and the new growth sprouts forth from amidst the decomposition.  Thus the wheat sprouts forth, breaks through the surface of the earth and is revealed above the ground.  This, however, is not the end of the process.  The thorns and debris that surround the wheat and threaten to ruin the produce must be cleared away.  With these laborious steps the process is finally completed and wheat worthy for consumption is produced. 

After the wheat has been grown, a new process begins—transforming the wheat into fine flour.  First, the wheat must be refined and separated from the surrounding chaff.  Then it must be finely ground into thin flour.  This flour must be sifted to remove the impurities.  Only after all of these steps have been performed is the true “solet,” the desired end-product obtained.  Now, one is ready to bake bread from this fine flour.  It is not for naught that we bless and thank Hashem for the final product of this complicated process:  "ברוך אתה ה' אלקינו מלך העולם המוציא לחם מן הארץ"—Blessed art Thou, Hashem . . . Who brings forth bread from the earth. 

“And this stumbling-block will be under your control”

This, then is the meaning of the passuk:  "אמת מארץ תצמח"—the truth is only revealed after this painstaking process of growth from the earth.  For, it is impossible for a lowly, physical being to arrive at the truth of a matter without first removing all of the thorns surrounding the rose.  The veils of falsehood must first be removed to reveal the underlying truth, in the sense of (Tehillim 12, 9):  "סביב רשעים יתהלכון"—the wicked walk on every side. 

This process of clarifying the truth from the surrounding falsehood is ever so apparent in the study of Torah.  It is impossible to arrive at a true halachah, based on legitimate Torah precepts, without first considering all possible scenarios.  Initially, the truth is not apparent, yet with HKB”H’s assistance the path to the truth is eventually illuminated.  Based on the passuk in Yeshayah (3, 6), the Gemarah describes this phenomenon as follows (Gittin 43a):  "והמכשלה הזאת תחת ידיך - אין אדם עומד על דברי תורה אלא אם כן נכשל בהן"—“and this stumbling-block is under your control,” a person does not arrive at the true meaning of words of Torah unless he has first stumbled in interpreting them. 

The process of refining the truth also applies to the issue of the performance of mitzvot.  It is impossible to serve Hashem with the perfect mindset and intent from the outset.  As we have learned in the Gemarah (Pesachim 50b):  "אמר רב יהודה אמר רב, לעולם יעסוק אדם בתורה ומצוות אף על פי שלא לשמה, שמתוך שלא לשמה בא לשמה"—one should strive to engage in Torah study and the performance of mitzvot even if one’s intent and purpose are initially insincere or misguided; for, by performing mitzvot in this less than ideal manner, one will eventually come to perform mitzvot in the desired, ideal manner. 

In the introduction to the sefer Teshuot Chen, authored by Rabbi Gedalyahu of Linitz, zy”a, a pupil writes the following in his name: 

"כאשר שמעתי מפי הרב המחבר מורי ורבי ז"ל [בעל תשואות חן], שאמר במאמרם ז"ל (פסחים נ:) לעולם יעסוק אדם בתורה שלא לשמה, שהוא דוקא כמשמעות מלת 'לעולם', שאין להיפטר מזה בתחילת היכנסו לעבודת השם יתברך, וכמו שבלתי אפשר לעלות על שליבת הסולם העליונה, אם לא פסע תחילה על שליבה שלמטה ממנה, כן צריך להיות שלא לשמה קודם הלשמה".

He focuses on the word "לעולם", meaning always, in the phrase "לעולם יעסוק אדם".  From the use of the word "לעולם" he deduces that this is not only a recommendation for less than ideal circumstances but is actually an essential step in the process.  To achieve the truth regarding the performance of mitzvot and service of Hashem, it is necessary to initially perform mitzvot and serve Hashem with improper intent.  It is analogous to climbing up a ladder.  It is impossible to reach the upper rungs of the ladder, without first stepping on the lower rungs. 

This coincides beautifully with what the Maor Einayim (Likutim parshat Nitzavim) writes regarding Chazal’s statement in the Gemarah (Berachot 34b):  "מקום שבעלי תשובה עומדין, צדיקים גמורים אינם עומדין"—in the place that penitents stand, the thoroughly righteous do not stand.  After all, at some stage of their lives, penitents, “ba’alei teshuvah,” have sunk to the depths of falsehood and darkness.  In that state, they came to recognize the emptiness, meaninglessness and lies that permeate our lives.  Hence, when they step out of the darkness, they are able to appreciate the enlightenment of truth more so than a person who has never sunk to those depths.  This is the lesson conveyed by the wisest of all men (Kohelet 2, 13):  "וראיתי אני שיש יתרון לחכמה מן הסכלות כיתרון האור מן החושך"—and I perceived that wisdom exceeds folly as does the light exceed the darkness.  One cannot fully appreciate the light until one has been stuck in the darkness.  Similarly, the truth cannot be fully revealed until it is seen in relation to its opposite--falsehood and lies. 

The Rectification of Falsehood Occurs when It Is Used to Reveal the Truth

Let us present the thought-provoking, yet alarming, words of the Sefat Emet (Toldot 5633).  He writes that in the realm of falsehood, it is impossible to arrive at the point of truth without combating falsehood with devices of falsehood.  This, in fact, is the method by which falsehood is rectified.  This explains why Yaakov Avinu—who is associated with truth, as per the passuk (Michah 7, 20):  "תתן אמת ליעקב"—grant truth to Yaakov—employed trickery and deception in his dealings with the wicked Eisav in order to acquire the blessings.  He states that it is not considered a lie if the ultimate goal is to arrive at the truth.  Then the Sefat Emet adds: 

ובוודאי בעולם הזה שנקרא עלמא דשיקרא, היתה כוונת הקב"ה לבוא להאמת על ידי זה דוקא, ועל ידי נקודה אמיתית שבלב אדם יוכל לעמוד נגד חבילות של שקר, כי שקר אין לו רגלים ואין לו קיום באמת, לכך נקודה אמת מבטל הרבה שקר".

This world is referred to as “almah d’shikrah,” a world of lies.  It was certainly HKB”H’s design that the truth be revealed specifically in this manner.  Guided by a pure focus of truth in a man’s heart, he can overcome many elements of falsehood.  As we know, a lie has no legs to stand on; therefore, a single truth can eradicate a large body of lies. 

In this manner, we can comprehend the words of our sweet psalmist:  "אמת מארץ תצמח"—truth shall sprout from the earth.  Clarification of the truth by human beings on earth requires a process of growth and development.  The thorns and debris--representing the forces of falsehood that embrace and envelop the truth—must be removed.  The external coverings must be ground down and sifted out.  Eventually, the unadulterated truth is revealed in her full glory and majesty.

Now, let us return to our sages’ enigmatic words.  At the time of creation, HKB”H sought the ministering angels’ counsel, whether or not to create man.  Emet, representing truth, voted against the creation of man, on the grounds that:  "אל יברא שכולו שקרים"—he is full of lies by nature.  To supply a resounding response:  "מה עשה הקב"ה, נטל אמת והשליכו לארץ, הדא הוא דכתיב ותשלך אמת ארצה"—HKB”H took Emet and threw her down to earth.  This divine act was meant to demonstrate that truth can only be revealed by means of an arduous process; the layers of lies surrounding it must be cleared away.  As we learned from the Sefat Emet, this process serves to rectify the falsehood, as well, since it served as a means of arriving at the truth. 

The other angels, observing this divine act, were perplexed.  Not comprehending, they remarked:  "רבון העולמים מה אתה מבזה תכסיס אלטיכסייה שלך, תעלה אמת מן הארץ"—Master of the Universe, how can You abuse Your trademark in this fashion?  Bring Emet back up from earth.  To explain the significance of HKB”H’s response, the Midrash cites the passuk:  "אמת מארץ תצמח"—truth shall sprout forth from the earth.  In other words, the truth of Torah can only be revealed through a process of growth and development on earth.  It necessitates man’s laborious efforts to remove the thorns and debris until the polished halachah is arrived at—resembling pure, fine flour. 

Let My Soul Be like Dust to All

Let us expand on the subject of why HKB”H threw Emet down to earth.  The Zera Kodesh, authored by the holy Rabbi of Rophshitz, zy”a, (Ha’azinu), provides us with a wonderful interpretation of the verse that appears toward the end of Shemoneh Esreh:  "ונפשי כעפר לכל תהיה"—and let my soul be like dust to all.  Here are his illuminating words: 

"והנה אנו מתפללין, ונפשי כעפר לכל תהיה... הפירוש הוא כך, דהנה אנו רואים בארץ ועפר, שמצמיח לנו כל מיני טובות שבעולם, ועוד הפלא ופלא מצינו בארץ, שכל מה שמוסיפים עליה זבל היא מצמחת יותר, אף שהזבל הוא דבר מאוס מאד, וכן כל מה שהזבל מטונף בטינופת יותר מצמיח עוד יותר.

והענין הוא, שהארץ מבררת אף קצת מהקצת טוב עדיין שבטינופת, ונוטלת מזה הטוב כוח הצמיחה, עד שפועלת שמזה הטינופת בא גם כן איזה דבר שבקדושה שפועל כוח הצמיחה, ואחר כך מברכים עליה המוציא לחם מן הארץ וכל ברכת הנהנין, וזהו שאומרים ונפשי כעפר לכל תהיה, שמכל דבר אף מה שנראה לעין שאין בו טוב כלל כנ"ל, גם כן נפשי תוציא מזה ניצוצי קדושה והטוב שבו כעפר".

He remarks on the phenomenon of growth from the earth.  We see that although the earth is composed of dust and dirt, all sorts of bounty and good things grow from the earth.  Remarkably, the more fertilizer that is added, the more and better things grow.  This occurs despite the fact that fertilizer is disgusting.  In fact, the dirtier and more decomposed the better. 

The secret, however, is that the earth finds the minute good that still remains within the manure.  From that tiny positive, good element it extracts the potential for growth.  Consequently, some element of kedushah results from this refuse.  Subsequently, we are able to recite the blessing of “He Who brought forth bread from the earth”-- המוציא לחם מן הארץ—and all of the other blessings that we recite over things that we derive pleasure and benefit from.  This is also the message conveyed by the words "ונפשי כעפר לכל תהיה"-- and let my soul be like dust to all.  From all things, even those things that appear to be devoid of any good, such as dust, let my soul find sparks of kedushah to extract. 

Let us embellish his sacred idea with a small idea of our own.  We know that man’s body was formed from the dust of the earth, as it is written (Bereishit 2, 7):  "וייצר ה' אלקים את האדם עפר מן האדמה"—and Hashem G-d formed the man of dust from the earth.  So, just like HKB”H created the earth with the unique power to refine sparks of kedushah—even from manure—so too man, who was created from the earth, possesses this same potential.  Man has the ability to refine the sparks of kedushah wherever they may be found in this world.  This is the meaning of our prayer:  "ונפשי כעפר לכל תהיה"-- and let my soul be like dust to all.  We are praying that we may manifest the very same potential that HKB”H implanted in the dust of the earth—from which man was created. 

For this reason, HKB”H threw Emet down to earth in response to Emet’s claim that it would be preferable if man was not created.   HKB”H indicated that just the opposite was true.  For, the earth has the potential to reveal sparks of kedushah even from manure and thereby to produce vegetation such as wheat.  Similarly, man who was created from the earth, has the potential to clarify and reveal the truth from within the shrouds of falsehood--"אמת מארץ תצמח"—truth shall sprout forth from the earth. 

HKB”H Chooses the Finest Scoopful

Continuing on along this exalted path, let us proceed to explain the deeper significance of the mitzvah of “kmitzah” associated with the korban-minchah:  "והביאה אל בני אהרן הכהנים, וקמץ משם מלוא קמצו מסלתה ומשמנה על כל לבונתה, והקטיר הכהן את אזכרתה המזבחה אשה ריח ניחוח לה'"-- He shall bring it to the sons of Aharon, the Kohanim, and he shall scoop from there his full three fingers full, of its fine flour and of its oil, as well as all its frankincense; and the Kohen shall cause its memorial portion to go up in smoke upon the altar—a fire-offering, a satisfactory aroma to Hashem.  The Gemarah (Yoma 19a) states:  "הני כהני שלוחא דרחמנא נינהו"—the Kohanim are the agents of HKB”H. 

HKB”H designed this mitzvah to teach us a vital lesson.  It is incumbent upon every Jew to bring a poor man’s offering to HKB”H—a “minchat-ani.”  He accomplishes this obligation by engaging and toiling in Torah study to the best of his ability—to clarify the true meaning and purpose of each halachah until it resembles pure, refined flour.  Then, he must combine it with oil—mitzvot and good deeds—and, lastly, add frankincense to the mixture—indicating that he is acting with the purest of intentions. 

Once this ritual has been completed, HKB”H, the supreme Kohen, proceeds to perform the act of “kmitzah,” as it were:  "וקמץ משם מלוא קמצו מסלתה ומשמנה על כל לבונתה"-- and he shall scoop from there his full three fingers full, of its fine flour and of its oil, as well as all its frankincense—from all of our Torah-study and performance of mitzvot, HKB”H takes, as it were, the best scoopful, representing the pure frankincense.  "והקטיר הכהן את אזכרתה המזבחה אשה ריח ניחוח לה'"-- and the Kohen shall cause its memorial portion to go up in smoke upon the altar—a fire-offering, a satisfactory aroma to Hashem.  For this choice three-finger scoopful is what provides Hashem with true satisfaction. 

In summary, we have learned that the purpose of our service to Hashem is to diligently study Torah and perform mitzvot until the ultimate truth is revealed—fulfilling the potential instilled in us of:  "אמת מארץ תצמח"—truth shall sprout forth from the earth.  Once we have fulfilled this obligation and have presented the supreme Kohen, HKB”H, with our poor man’s minchah offering, we can request that He fulfill the mitzvah of “kmitzah” on our behalf. 

Three Fingers Represent Three “Vav”s

According to what we have learned, we can now provide an explanation for the significance of the three finger “kmitzah” procedure.  As Rashi explains (Vayikra 2, 2):  "מלוא קמצו - יכול מבורץ - מבצבץ ויוצא לכל צד, תלמוד לומר במקום אחר (שם שם ו) והרים ממנו בקמצו, לא יהא כשר אלא מה שבתוך הקומץ, אי בקמצו יכול חסר, תלמוד לומר מלוא, הא כיצד, חופה ג' אצבעותיו על פס ידו, וזהו קומץ במשמע לשון העברית".  The three finger scoop is not to be overflowing, nor is it to be deficient; it is to be precisely what is contained between his three middle fingers and his palm; this is the definition of a “kometz.” 

Let us now present an idea from the great Rabbi David of Leluv’s, zy”a, commentary on the piyut Atkinu Seudata--which was composed by the Arizal and is recited on Friday night.  In the piyut we find the phrase "בווין תתקטר".  These words can be translated very literally as stating that the “vav”s should be bound together.  Now, the Zohar hakadosh states (Acharei 73a):  "ג' דרגין אינון מתקשרן דא בדא, קוב"ה אורייתא וישראל"—the three entities of HKB”H, the Torah and Yisroel are intimately connected with one another.  We can suggest that each of these sacred entities is represented by the letter “vav.”  For, the letter “vav” can be represented by three different spellings:  וא"ו or וי"ו or ו"ו.  Each of these spellings is referred to as a “milui” of the letter “vav”—i.e. the full spelling of the name of the letter.

The first milui, וא"ו, has a numerical value of thirteen—the same as the word אח"ד, meaning one and alluding to HKB”H, the one and only One.  The second milui, וי"ו, has a numerical value of twenty-two and alludes to the Torah that is composed of the twenty-two letters of the aleph-bet.  The third milui, ו"ו, has a numerical value of twelve and represents the twelve tribes, which make up the congregation of Yisroel.  It is the connection of these three “vav”s that the Arizal is alluding to with his poetic words:  "בווין תתקטר"—HKB”H, the Torah and Yisroel must unite as one, for they are meant to be inseparable.  This was the idea from Rabbi David of Leluv, zy”a. 

Finally, we have learned in the Mishnah (Avot 6, 11):  כל מה שברא הקב"ה בעולמו לא ברא אלא לכבודו"—everything HKB”H created in His world, He only created solely for His own glory.  In fact, every good deed should be aimed at enhancing and fortifying the tri-fold unit made up of the glory of HKB”H, the glory of the Torah and the glory of Yisroel.  In this light, we can better appreciate the significance of the ritual of “kmitzah,” which was performed with the three middle fingers.  Those three fingers symbolically represent three “vav”s.  This teaches us that the supreme, heavenly Kohen, HKB”H, selectively takes a scoopful, equivalent  to His three-finger “kmitzah,” from all of our Torah and mitzvot.  He chooses only that portion that serves to enhance the glory of the triple entity formed by the Torah, HKB”H and Yisroel. 

Vayikra. A General Discussion about Korbanos.

To the modern mind, animal sacrifice is so foreign as to be incomprehensible.  I would like to propose a perspective that some of you might not be aware of.

In the donations to the construction of the Mishkan, three very puzzling behaviors are mentioned.
1. The hair of the goats that was used to make the curtains was spun off of the bodies of the living goats:  unlike wool, which is shorn, goat hair is plucked off gently from the goat, as in the case of Cashmere.  The spinners spun the hair as they removed it from the living goats.  (Rashi, Shemos 35:26)
2. The gold and silver ornaments the women donated were not brought in boxed or wrapped.  They were worn to the office and given directly from their bodies to the collectors.  (Rashi, Shemos 35:22)
3. The oil for the menora was not pressed from olives on the ground: they climbed ladders into the trees and began the oil removal right there as they pulled the olives off of the branches. (Rashi, Shemos 35:14)

In all these cases, the life force that was associated with the offering was an integral part of the donation.  The same is true with animal sacrifice.  We're not killing cows, we're not just ending their lives in order to eat them: we are weaving their life-force into the spiritual web of the universe.  Vayikra 17:11- כי נפש הבשר בדם היא ואני נתתיו לכם על המזבח לכפר על נפשותיכם כי הדם הוא בנפש יכפר.


This is not exclusive to the sacrifice of animals and birds.

Vayikra. A Brisker Discussion on Korbanos and Chametz

I've written the English parts, on a whim, almost completely in standard English, excepting words like Chametz and passuk. 


This is what the Briskers call "A Famous Question."  


The Gemara in Pesachim 5a and 28b brings opinions that Chametz is prohibited on the fourteenth of Nissan in the afternoon, even before Pesach begins that night.  The Gemara derives this from two pesukim.  Rava on 5a derives it from Shemos 34:25 לא תשחט על חמץ דם זבחי, and Reb Yehuda on 28b derives it from Devarim 16:3- ומנין לאוכל חמץ משש שעות ולמעלה שהוא בלא תעשה שנאמר לא תאכל עליו חמץ.  The language of the Rambam (1 Ch'uM 8) is 

אסור לאכול חמץ ביום ארבעה עשר מחצות היום ולמעלה שהוא מתחלת שעה שביעית ביום. וכל האוכל בזמן הזה לוקה מן התורה שנאמר לא תאכל עליו חמץ, כלומר על קרבן הפסח. כך למדו מפי השמועה בפירוש דבר זה לא תאכל חמץ משעה שראויה לשחיטת הפסח שהוא בין הערבים והוא חצי היום

The Ra'avad argues and says 

 וכל האוכל בזמן הזה לוקה מן התורה. א"א מלקות מחצות ואילך אינו מחוור דכיון דקי"ל כר"ש בלפני זמנו ואחר זמנו דלא דריש הנך קראי לא תאכל לא תאכלו בלפני זמנו ואחר זמנו נהי דאסור באכילה מן התורה מביום הראשון תשביתו שאור או מלא תשחט על חמץ כדרבה אבל איסור הנאה ליכא מן התורה ומלקות נמי ליתא

Note that the Rambam says that the source of the prohibition is Rava's passuk from Daf 5a, and the Ra'avad's is Reb Yehuda on 28b.

The Gemara in Zevachim 56a says: How do we know that the blood of a Korban becomes deconsecrated and profaned with sunset/Shkiah?  

אמר רב יצחק בר אבודימי מנין לדם שנפסל בשקיעת החמה שנאמר (ויקרא ז) ביום הקריבו את זבחו יאכל ביום שאתה זובח אתה מקריב ביום שאי אתה זובח אי אתה מקריב 

Only on the day that you shechted the Korban may you place its blood on the altar; afterwards, the blood is passul.  


Tosfos asks, who needs this passuk?  We know that sacrificial service can only be done during the daytime from Vaykira 7:38, ביום צוותו את בני ישראל להקריב את קרבניהם, and so the blood service can only be done during the day.  Once sunset has passed, it is no longer day, and you would have to wait until the next day to continue- which is impossible, because all items that have been sanctified for use on the altar are profaned with the break of dawn.  So who needs to know that Sunset profanes the blood, when you won't be able to use it until the next day, at which point it is profaned, on the basis of a different passuk, at the break of dawn?  Although there is an opinion that items that are kept on the roof of the Altar are protected from the profanation caused by Daybreak, what of the other opinion, that being on the Altar affords no protection at all?

Tosfos in Zevachim 56a and in Menachos 20b says two answers.

1. That although there is a general profanation of sacrificial items at daybreak, there is reason to think this problem would not apply to sacrificial blood. Our passuk is needed to tell us that sacrificial blood is subject to the same profanation. 

2. That although, according to Rabbeinu Tam, night begins with the second definition of Sunset, Shkiah Shni'ah, which is fifty nine minutes after what we call Shkiah Rishonah, the first Sunset, this does not apply to Sacrifices.  The tremendous novelty of this passuk is that unlike all other definitions of day, which, according to Rabbeinu Tam, ends at the second Shkiah, in the context of Sacrifices, day ends with Shkiah Rishonah.

The Rambam (4 Ma'Hak 1) says

כל הקרבנות אין מקריבין אותן אלא ביום שנאמר ביום צוותו את בני ישראל להקריב את קרבניהם ביום ולא בלילה. לפיכך אין שוחטין זבחים אלא ביום ואין זורקין דמים אלא ביום השחיטה שנאמר ביום הקריבו את זבחו ביום הזביחה תהיה ההקרבה. וכיון ששקעה החמה נפסל הדם

In this Rambam we see that he attributes the profanation of the sacrificial blood to the passuk that requires the service to be done by day, which is consistent with the first answer of Tosfos- that the problem with left over blood is that daybreak profanes it, and we need our passuk only to tell us that sacrificial blood is no different than other sacrificial items, and so once you can't continue the service at night, the next day it is profaned already by daybreak.

So someone asked Reb Chaim Brisker the following question:

If the prohibition of Chametz on the fourteenth is based on לא תאכל חמץ משעה שראויה לשחיטת הפסח, that you cannot eat chametz when you may shecht the Korban Pesach, then this issur should end as soon as the time of Shechita ends.  Of course, at that point it is already Pesach, and the Yomtov prohibition of Chametz is in place.  But if you combine the Rambam with Rabbeinu Tam, then this creates an absurdity:  The time of Shechita ends at the first shkiah, and the Yomtov only begins at the second shkiah, then there are 59 minutes during which the prohibition of "chametz during Shechita time" has ended, and the prohibition of "chametz during Pesach" has not yet begun.  This, of course, is impossible.

Reb Chaim answered him that although it is true that the sacrificial blood is profaned at the first Shkiah, this does not prove that it is not "the time of Shechita."  The profanation of the sacrificial blood is specific to the blood, but if one were to shecht the korban at that time, although the blood produced would indeed be absolutely profaned, the act of Shechita would be viewed as a legitimate sacrificial act.  Therefore, it is incorrect to claim that the inevitable profanation of the sacrificial blood proves that this is not "the time of Shechita."  It is the time of shechita, but if you shecht, the blood will become profaned.  True, the profanation of the blood would render the shechita futile, but that does not prove that the act of Shechita was not a legitimate sacrificial act.


I have several major problems with Reb Chaim's answer.  (I know that the person who asked the question was not worried about either the Rambam or Rabbeinu Tam, because there is no reason on Earth to think they agree with each other on the derivation of the pre-pesach issur and they certainly don't agree on the shkiah issue.  He was just asking a clever what-if question.  But Reb Chaim's answer has to make sense.  And Reb Chaim was not playing games, because he is quoted by the Brisker Rov and by Rav Shach in his Avi Ezri 1 Ma'Hak 4, who says he was very happy to have thought of Reb Chaim's answer before hearing it from the Brisker Rov.)  


Problem 1.  While Shechita is a sacrificial act, the purpose of shechita is to produce sacrificial blood.  The Gemara in Chulin (33a) states that unlike the shechita of non-hekdesh animals, 

אי בקדשים, כי לא יצא מהן דם כשרה? הוא עצמו לדם הוא צריך 

 that an act of Shechita of a korban that did not produce blood is not shechita.  If so, to say that shechting at a time when the blood will inevitably become useless is, to my mind, exactly the same as a shechita that does not produce blood at all.  Therefore, you cannot call this "the time of Shechita" because the Shechita itself will be passul for having produced no blood.


Problem 2.  The Rambam, like Tosfos' first answer, doesn't hold that Shkiah profanes the blood.  He says that you can't do the service after the day ends, because sacrificial service must be done during the day, and since you have to wait until the next morning to continue, daybreak will then profane the blood.  So techincally, there is no "Profanation of the sacrificial blood caused by Shki'ah."  There is only a forced end of the service of the day.  So how can Reb Chaim say that it is day for shechita despite a tangential profanation of the blood.  The Rambam clearly stated that the reason the blood becomes useless is because the day's sacrificial work has come to an end, and that includes the shechita.  It is no longer "the time of Shechita."


In thinking about this second problem, I realized that even according to Tosfos first answer/the Rambam, the blood does become profaned at the moment of Shkiah.  Since at the moment of shkiah its fate was sealed, there is nothing you're going to able to do with it, then even though the cause of that problem is the inability to use it at night and the inevitable profanation of daybreak, this causes it to become immediately profaned under the rule of Mishmeres/Hesech HaDaas, that items of sacrificial service have to be held in preparation, in expectation, in anticipation of service.  Here, their uselessness is immediate with shkiah, so they become profaned at the very moment that their uselessness becomes inevitable.  But this doesn't help Reb Chaim.  The blood is only useless because it's not day any more, and if it's not day for the blood, it's not day for Shechita either.


3.  Why would anyone think that the erev Pesach prohibition of Chametz, which begins when you can shecht the Korban, ends before you've eaten the korban?  To me, it is self evident that if the Torah prohibits chametz when you can begin the sacrificial service of the Pesach, then how much more so is chametz prohibited when the Korban is ready and waiting to be eaten.  This is not a kal vachomer, an a fortiori.  It is too obvious to need any rule of a fortiori.  There is no logic on Earth to think that chametz is prohibited during the initial preparatory stages of a korban but permitted during the pendency or the denouement of the korban.  So although the Rambam uses a passuk that refers to "the time of shechita,"  it is obvious that the same prohibition applies FROM "the time of the shechita" until the korban has been consumed (at which point, of course, the Pesach prohibition of Chametz has come into effect.)

Vayikra 1:2. Adam ki yakriv mikem korban. Areivus- The Nation as an Organism.

אָדָם כִּי יַקְרִיב מִכֶּם קָרְבָּן
"If a man among you will bring a korban."

This passuk starts with in the singular-Adam- and ends with a reference to the plural- mikem. The medrash here (4:6) talks about mutual responsibility and group identity of the nation.

תני חזקיה (ירמיה נ) 'שה פזורה ישראל' נמשלו ישראל לשה. מה שה הזה לוקה על ראשו או בא' מאבריו וכל אבריו מרגישין. כך הן ישראל אחד מהן חוטא וכולן מרגישין. (במדבר טז) האיש אחד יחטא תני רשב"י משל לבני אדם שהיו יושבין בספינה נטל אחד מהן מקדח והתחיל קודח תחתיו. אמרו לו חבריו מה אתה יושב ועושה? אמר להם מה אכפת לכם? לא תחתי אני קודח? אמרו לו, שהמים עולין ומציפין עלינו את הספינה! כך אמר איוב (איוב יט) ואף אמנם שגיתי אתי תלין משוגתי. אמרו לו חביריו (שם לד) כי יוסף על חטאתו פשע בינינו יספוק אתה מספיק בינינו את עונותיך

A person on a boat takes an chisel and begins gouging a hole in the floor of his cabin. Everyone screams at him to stop, and he answers, “What business is it of yours?  I'm making the hole in my own cabin.” The passuk here is telling us that a man’s behavior is “mikem”, he is a part of the organic whole of the nation. His sin affects the community as a whole, by coarsening and polluting the entire world. When he does teshuva and brings a korban, he elevates and benefits the entire briyah.

Same idea— Sanhedrin 27, going on the passuk in Vayikra 26 “vekashlu ish b’achiv,” that “ish b’avon achiv, shekulan areivin zeh bazeh.”  This is one of the places that Chazal say "Kol Yisrael areivin zeh Bazeh," usually quoted as "Kol Yisrael areivin zeh lazeh."  We are responsible for each other, and we answer for each others' behavior.

One of the practical ramifications of this concept is this: Sometimes, a person can fulfill a mitzva through an agent.  Example- blowing the shofar or reading the megilla.  However, the agent needs to be obligated to do the mitzva as well.  A woman cannot blow the shofar for men, because women are, technically, not obligated to blow the shofar.  If so, can a person who has already fulfilled a mitzva do it as an agent for someone else?  And can he make a bracha when doing so, because the words of the bracha are "asher kidshanu be'mitzvosav ve'tzivanu," who has obligated us to do this mitzvah," and the agent is no longer obligated.  But because of the rule of Arvus/Areivus, the agent is considered to have a current "obligation" to do the mitzvah: the obligation to see to it that others fulfill it.  Thus, not only can he be an agent on behalf of the others, he can even say "vetzivanu", because he is still obligated.  As long as the others haven't done the mitzva, I haven't fulfilled the mitzva.

The word Areivin and the idea of Arvus has often been associated with the rules of a guarantor or a co-signer on a loan, also called an Areiv.

The sefer Shearim Metzuyanim Behalacha brings from a sefer called Siach Yitzchak the following: The opinion of the Bahag is that if you already fulfilled a mitzvah, you can't be motzi someone if the guy knows how to make a bracha himself.  This Sefer explains the reasoning of the Bahag like this: there's no din arvus where the loveh can pay himself.  The guarantor of a loan is not liable unless the debtor cannot or refuses to pay.  Here too: if the other person is willing and able to make the bracha, you have no arvus at all.


I don't know who this Siach Yitzchak is, but he is wrong for several reasons:

1. The bahag is talking about the bracha, not the mitzvah. If he can't do the mitzva himself, then you have arvus on the mitzvah, and once you're an arev on the mitzvah, you can make the bracha even if the guy could make the bracha himself.

2. See the sefer Mishulchan Gavoah in Nitzavim that brings that Reb Chaim explains the difference between areiv (guarantor) and kablan (co-signer); An areiv is only responsible for results of loveh's default; it is not a liability for the loan, it is a promise to pay that only comes into being when triggered by the debtor's default.  A Kablan, on the other hand, is responsible for the loan itself. Since you can use arvus to make a bracha for other person, Reb Chaim says it must be that the arvus of mitzvos is really kablanus. Reb Boruch Ber says this explains the Gemara in Shabbos that when Klal Yisrael is punished for failure to be mekayeim mitzvos, the tzadikim are punished first. Why? As areivim, they should not be first. Answer- they're not just areivim, they're kablanim.

So according to Reb Chaim, the pshat in bahag is wrong, because if we're kablanim, our obligation exists even where the principal is capable of fulfilling his obligation.

On the other hand, it could be that this is gufa the machlokes: Because R' Akiva Eiger there brings from Pri Chadash that we don't hold like the Bahag. What's the machlokes?  Maybe the Bahag holds we have a din Areiv, and the Pri Chadash holds we have a din Kablan.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~